DOCSLIB.ORG

Facial Recognition Technology: Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Should Better Assess Privacy and Other Risks, GAO-21-243SU (Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2021)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Facial Recognition Technology: Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Should Better Assess Privacy and Other Risks, GAO-21-243SU (Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2021) United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters June 2021 FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Should Better Assess Privacy and Other Risks Accessible Version GAO-21-518 June 2021 FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Should Better Assess Privacy and Other Risks Highlights of GAO-21-518, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Federal agencies that employ law GAO surveyed 42 federal agencies that employ law enforcement officers about enforcement officers can use facial their use of facial recognition technology. Twenty reported owning systems with recognition technology to assist facial recognition technology or using systems owned by other entities, such as criminal investigations, among other other federal, state, local, and non-government entities (see figure). activities. For example, the technology can help identify an unknown individual Ownership and Use of Facial Recognition Technology Reported by Federal Agencies that in a photo or video surveillance. Employ Law Enforcement Officers GAO was asked to review federal law enforcement use of facial recognition technology. This report examines the 1) ownership and use of facial recognition technology by federal agencies that employ law enforcement officers, 2) types of activities these agencies use the technology to support, and 3) the extent that these agencies track employee use of facial recognition technology owned by non- federal entities. GAO administered a survey questionnaire to 42 federal agencies that employ law enforcement officers regarding their use of the technology. GAO also reviewed documents (e.g., system descriptions) and interviewed officials from selected agencies (e.g., agencies that owned facial recognition technology). This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in April 2021. Information that agencies deemed sensitive has been omitted. What GAO Recommends GAO is making two recommendations to each of 13 federal agencies to Note: For more details, see figure 2 in GAO-21-518. implement a mechanism to track what non-federal systems are used by Agencies reported using the technology to support several activities (e.g., employees, and assess the risks of criminal investigations) and in response to COVID-19 (e.g., verify an individual’s using these systems. Twelve agencies identity remotely). Six agencies reported using the technology on images of the concurred with both recommendations. unrest, riots, or protests following the death of George Floyd in May 2020. Three U.S. Postal Service concurred with one agencies reported using it on images of the events at the U.S. Capitol on January and partially concurred with the other. 6, 2021. Agencies said the searches used images of suspected criminal activity. GAO continues to believe the All fourteen agencies that reported using the technology to support criminal recommendation is valid, as described investigations also reported using systems owned by non-federal entities. in the report. However, only one has awareness of what non-federal systems are used by employees. By having a mechanism to track what non-federal systems are used View GAO-21-518. For more information, by employees and assessing related risks (e.g., privacy and accuracy-related contact Gretta L. Goodwin at (202) 512-8777 or [email protected]. risks), agencies can better mitigate risks to themselves and the public. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background 4 Twenty Federal Agencies Reported Owning or Using Systems with Facial Recognition Technology 8 Federal Agencies Reported Using Systems with Facial Recognition Technology to Support Various Activities 18 Most Agencies Do Not Track Non-Federal Systems in Use or Related Risks 22 Conclusions 28 Recommendations for Executive Action 28 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 31 Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 36 Appendix II: Systems with Facial Recognition Technology Owned by Federal Agencies that Employ Law Enforcement Officers 42 Appendix III: Other Federal Systems with Facial Recognition Technology 62 Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services 67 Agency Comment Letter 69 Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 71 Agency Comment Letter 75 Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of the Interior 79 Agency Comment Letter 82 Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of State 85 Agency Comment Letter 88 Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department of the Treasury 91 Agency Comment Letter 94 Appendix IX: Comments from the Federal Bureau of Investigation 97 Agency Comment Letter 99 Appendix X: Comments from the United States Postal Service 101 Agency Comment Letter 103 Page i GAO-21-518 Facial Recognition Technology Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 105 GAO Contact 105 Staff Acknowledgments 105 Tables Table 1: Systems with Facial Recognition Technology that Federal Agencies Employing Law Enforcement Officers Reported as Owned or in Procurement, January 2015 through March 2020, and System Status 11 Table 2: Reported Use of Other Entities’ Facial Recognition Technology by Federal Agencies that Employ Law Enforcement Officers 12 Table 3: Select Systems with Facial Recognition Technology Owned by Federal Agencies 13 Table 4: Federal Agency Reported Use of Facial Recognition Technology on Images of Individuals Suspected of Violating the Law during Civil Unrest, Riots, or Protests, May through August 2020 19 Table 5: Federal Agency Tracking of Employee Use of Non- Federal Systems with Facial Recognition Technology 23 Table 6: 42 Federal Agencies Selected in GAO’s Work 37 Figures Figure 1: Facial Recognition Technology Search Process 6 Figure 2: Ownership and Use of Facial Recognition Technology Reported by Federal Agencies that Employ Law Enforcement Officers 9 Figure 3: Selected Federal, State, and Non-government Systems with Facial Recognition Technology Used by Federal Agencies that Employ Law Enforcement Officers, and the Number of Photos in Them 17 Figure 4: Illustration of a Facial Recognition Technology Summary 43 Abbreviations ABIS Automated Biometric Identification System AutoCAT Automated Credential Authentication Technology BOP Federal Bureau of Prisons CAT-2 Credential Authentication Technology-2 CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 DHS Department of Homeland Security Page ii GAO-21-518 Facial Recognition Technology DOD Department of Defense FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FDA Food and Drug Administration HART Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology System ICE U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement IDENT Automated Biometric Identification System NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration OBIM Office of Biometric Identity Management OMB Office of Management and Budget PFPA Pentagon Force Protection Agency Secret Service U.S. Secret Service TSA Transportation Security Administration VA U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. Page iii GAO-21-518 Facial Recognition Technology 441 G St. N.W. Washington, DC 20548 Letter June 3, 2021 Congressional Requesters Of all the technologies used to identify people based on their biological and behavioral characteristics, facial recognition most closely mimics how people identify others: by examining their face. Law enforcement can use facial recognition technology to assist criminal investigations, among other activities. For example, the technology can help identify an unknown individual from a photo or image from video surveillance. There are multiple ways to access the technology. Law enforcement may own facial recognition technology, or use technology that is owned by another entity (e.g., federal, state, or non-government entity). However, with use of facial recognition technology expanding, members of Congress and academics have highlighted the importance of understanding what technologies are owned and how they are used by federal law enforcement. We previously examined aspects of federal agencies’ use of facial recognition technology. In September 2020, we reported the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) and Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) use of the technology at U.S. ports of entry.1 In May 2016, we reported on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) use of facial recognition technology.2 You asked us to review federal law enforcement use of facial recognition technology. This report examines: 1GAO, Facial Recognition: CBP and TSA are Taking Steps to Implement Programs, but CBP Should Address Privacy and System Performance Issues, GAO-20-568 (Washington, D.C.: September 2, 2020). In this report, GAO made five recommendations to CBP related to its use of facial recognition technology. The Department of Homeland Security concurred with our recommendations, but as of April 2021, has not implemented them. 2GAO, Face Recognition Technology: FBI Should Better Ensure Privacy and Accuracy, GAO-16-267 (Washington, D.C.: May 16, 2016). In this report, we made six recommendations related to accuracy and privacy regarding the FBI’s use of facial recognition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Law Enforcement Officers, 2016
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics October 2019, NCJ 251922 Bureau of Justice Statistics Bureau Federal Law Enforcement Ofcers, 2016 – Statistical Tables Connor Brooks, BJS Statistician s of the end of fscal-year 2016, federal FIGURE 1 agencies in the United States and Distribution of full-time federal law enforcement U.S. territories employed about 132,000 ofcers, by department or branch, 2016 Afull-time law enforcement ofcers. Federal law enforcement ofcers were defned as any federal Department of ofcers who were authorized to make arrests Homeland Security and carry frearms. About three-quarters of Department of Justice federal law enforcement ofcers (about 100,000) Other executive- provided police protection as their primary branch agencies function. Four in fve federal law enforcement ofcers, regardless of their primary function, Independent agencies worked for either the Department of Homeland · Security (47% of all ofcers) or the Department Judicial branch Tables Statistical of Justice (33%) (fgure 1, table 1). Legislative branch Findings in this report are from the 2016 0 10 20 30 40 50 Census of Federal Law Enforcement Ofcers Percent (CFLEO). Te Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted the census, collecting data on Note: See table 1 for counts and percentages. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Census of Federal Law 83 agencies. Of these agencies, 41 were Ofces Enforcement Ofcers, 2016. of Inspectors General, which provide oversight of federal agencies and activities. Te tables in this report provide statistics on the number, functions, and demographics of federal law enforcement ofcers. Highlights In 2016, there were about 100,000 full-time Between 2008 and 2016, the Amtrak Police federal law enforcement ofcers in the United had the largest percentage increase in full-time States and U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection Process Amtrak® Police
    Stage 4.1 Selection Process SM Post-Offer Psychological Examinations* Protecting“America’s Railroad ” Candidates who successfully complete the ® Stage 1 interview phase will be administered a post- Amtrak Police Department Position Posting and Resume Review offer psychological examination. Candidates Selected applicants who meet or exceed basic that have successfully completed the above qualifications for employment will be scheduled stages will be scheduled for an interview with a for the Orientation/Testing. psychologist. Stage 1.1 Stage 5 Physical Agility Testing* Final non-medical stage The position of Police Officer requires that All interviews, testing, and background applicants meet Physical Agility Standards and investigations are completed and reviewed. Requirements, which include: Stage 6 Test Standard Medical Examination Candidates must successfully pass a medical 1 bench press 57% of your body weight examination and drug test for use of illegal Agility run 20.6 seconds substances. 300 meter run 92 seconds Stage 7 Push-up 12 Candidate Notification 1.5 mile run 19 min 45 sec All candidates who successfully completed all stages of the selection process and who will be Stage 2 offered a position will be notified by a Human Orientation/Testing Capital Department representative. The candidate will be provided with an Note: The entire selection process may take up to 12 months to application. The written examination (police and complete. security officers), typing test (communication * Police Officers Only officers) and pre-offer written psychological test (police officers only) will be administered at the Probationary Period Orientation. Candidates eligible for appointment to the Stage 3 Amtrak Police Department will be subject to Interview a 12 month probationary period from the Successful candidates will undergo an oral date of railroad police commission receipt.
    [Show full text]
  • HR 218, the “Law Enforcement Officers' Safety Act” and S. 1132
    H.R. 218, the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act” and S. 1132, the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act Improvements Act” and H.R. 4310, the “National Defense Authorization Act” On 22 July 2004, President George W. Bush signed H.R. 218, the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act,” into law. The Act, now Public Law 108-277, went into effect immediately. The bill exempts qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from local and State prohibitions on the carrying of concealed firearms. On 12 October 2010, President Barack H. Obama II signed S. 1132, the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act Improvements Act,” into law. The Act, now Public Law 111-272, went into effect immediately. The bill improves the ability of retired officers to comply with the documents required by existing Federal law when carrying a firearm under 18 USC 926C and makes other modifications to existing law. On 2 January 2013, President Barack H. Obama II signed H.R. 4310, the “National Defense Authorization Act,” into law. The Act, now Public Law 112-239, went into effect immediately. The Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act (LEOSA) as amended can be cited as 18 USC 926B (for active duty law enforcement officers) and 18 USC 926C (for retired or separated officers). Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about LEOSA: Who is eligible to carry concealed firearms under this legislation? Qualified law enforcement officers employed by or retired from a local, State or Federal law enforcement agency. A “qualified active law enforcement officer” is defined as an employee
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Security Measures
    Amtrak Security Measures PROTECTING AMERICA’S RAILROAD® Amtrak is working hard to protect America’s Railroad® and improve resiliency of passenger rail across the country. Through a multi-layered approach, Amtrak uses enhanced security measures to make it harder for those who seek to do harm to our passengers, employees, equipment and facilities and ensure an efficient response to potential threats. This multi-layered approach includes deployment of Amtrak Police Department officers and intelligence gathering activities; protection of critical rail assets through targeted access control and infrastructure protection measures; security awareness, training and exercises; consistent engagement with first responders and transit partners; and security program planning rooted in risk management principles to ensure effective implementation of mitigation strategies. These efforts are led collaboratively by the Amtrak Emergency Management and Corporate Security (EMCS) department and the Amtrak Police Department (APD) with involvement of leadership and each department across Amtrak. AMTRAK ENVIRONMENT Because of advantages such as easy access, convenient locations and intermodal connections, rail and mass transit systems are completely different from the structure and organization of the airline transportation and airport industry. As a result, the security framework that works in the airport setting is not easily transferable to the rail station system. Additionally, the vastness of the Amtrak passenger rail system, spanning the entire country, adds another layer of openness not seen in other passenger systems. To mitigate the vulnerabilities associated with this unique type of an open environment, Amtrak consistently evaluates its security measures, as well as industry standards and best practices, to employ security solutions that are effective in mitigating these vulnerabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak) Law Department 3E-108 60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E
    U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration J.F.K. Federal Building, Room E340 Boston, MA 02203 Telephone (617) 565-9857 Fax (617) 565-9827 Web: www.whistleblowers.gov VIA UPS # 1ZX104980190219739 January 18, 2017 Megan Kinsey, Esq. Associate General Counsel National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Law Department 3E-108 60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002 Re: National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak) / DeJoseph / 1-0080-11-061 Dear Ms. Kinsey: This is to advise you that we have completed our investigation of the above-referenced complaint filed by Mr. Michael DeJoseph (Complainant) against The National Railroad Passenger Corporation “Respondent” on August 3, 2011, under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), 49 U.S.C. §20109. In brief, Complainant alleged that he was terminated after raising safety and health concerns, violations of laws, regulations, and rules to Respondent. Following an investigation by a duly-authorized investigator, the Secretary of Labor, acting through his agent, the Acting Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Region 1, finds there is reasonable cause to believe that Respondent violated the FRSA and issues the following findings: Secretary’s Findings On or about June 24, 2011, Complainant contends that he suffered an adverse employment action because Respondent failed to place him into positions for which he applied, was qualified, and instead terminated his employment. On August 3, 2011, Complainant filed a complaint with the Secretary of Labor alleging that Respondent retaliated against him in violation of the FRSA. As this complaint was filed within 180 days of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed timely.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 2 Mission & Vision
    Amtrak Police Department Annual Report 2019 Table of Contents Mission and Vision 3 Message from the Chief 4 Overview 6 Staffing 8 Budget & Expenditures 10 Calls for Service 11 Group A&B Incidents 12 Screening, Train Rides and ROW Checks 13 Office of Professional Responsibilities 14 2019 Highlights: New England Division 16 New York Division 17 Mid-Atlantic Division North 18 Mid-Atlantic Division South 19 Central & Western Divisions 20 2019 Operations: Special Agents 21 K-9 Unit 22 Public Affairs & Administration 23 Special Events 24 Safety Initiatives 26 Specialized Training 29 AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2019 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 2 Mission & Vision Our Mission Protecting America’s Railroad. Our Vision Professionally safeguard Amtrak employees, customers, patrons and infrastructure through partnerships and best practices while displaying respect and pride. AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2019 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 3 Message from the Chief AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2019 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 4 Throughout 2019, the sworn and civilian members of the APD continued to demonstrate a commitment to security and safety for our customers and fellow employees. This 2019 Annual Report provides an excellent opportunity to recognize and commend the fine men and women of the Amtrak Police Department (APD). I am proud of what the members of the department have accomplished and look forward to what the future brings. Chief Neil Trugman Amtrak Police Department AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2019 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 5 Overview Like rail transportation systems worldwide and mass transit systems in the United States, Amtrak operates in a very “open” and therefore porous environment. Because of advantages such as easy access, convenient locations and intermodal connections, rail and mass transit systems are completely different from the structure and organization of the airline transportation and airport industry.
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-20-404, Passenger Rail Security: TSA Engages With
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Addressees April 2020 PASSENGER RAIL SECURITY TSA Engages with Stakeholders but Could Better Identify and Share Standards and Key Practices GAO-20-404 April 2020 PASSENGER RAIL SECURITY TSA Engages with Stakeholders but Could Better Identify and Share Standards and Key Practices Highlights of GAO-20-404, a report to congressional addressees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Recent physical and cyberattacks on The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) assesses passenger rail risks rail systems in U.S. and foreign through the Transportation Sector Security Risk Assessment, the Baseline cities highlight the importance of Assessment for Security Enhancement (BASE), and threat assessments. TSA strengthening and securing uses the risk assessment to evaluate threat, vulnerability, and consequence for passenger rail systems around the attack scenarios across various transportation modes. TSA surface inspectors world. TSA is the primary federal use the baseline assessment, a voluntary security review for mass transit, agency responsible for securing passenger rail, and highway systems, to address potential vulnerabilities and transportation in the United States. share best practices, among other things. GAO was asked to review TSA’s TSA works with U.S. stakeholders to identify security standards and key efforts to assess passenger rail risk, practices and identifies foreign standards and practices through multilateral and as well as its role in identifying and sharing security standards and key bilateral exchanges. However, TSA Representatives (TSARs), the primary practices. This report addresses (1) overseas point of contact for transportation security matters, lack specific TSA’s efforts to assess risk; (2) the guidance on foreign rail stakeholder engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents
    AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT 2016 ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents Mission and Vision 3 Message from the Chief 4 Department Maps 6 Organizational Chart & Demographics 7 Staffing 8 New Hires 9 Budget & Expenditures 10 Department Awards 11 2016 Calls for Service 12 2016 Crime Offence Statistics 13 New England Division 14 New York Division 20 Mid-Atlantic Division North 24 Mid-Atlantic Division South 28 Central & West Divisions 32 Special Operations Division - SOU 36 Special Operations Division - AIT 40 Special Operations Division - K-9 Unit 42 Operations Support 45 Internal Affairs 46 Administration & Public Affairs 48 Special Events 49 40th Year Anniversary 54 Safety Initiatives 56 Implementation of New Initiatives 60 Milestones 62 Specialized Training 63 Contact Information 67 AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2016 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 2 Our Mission Protecting “America’s Railroad” Our Vision Professionally safeguard Amtrak employees, passengers, patrons and infrastructure through partnerships and best practices while displaying respect and pride. AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2016 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 3 I am honored to present the Amtrak Police Department (APD) 2016 Annual Report. This report highlights the department’s activities throughout the year, which included many important events and achievements. The members of the APD provide professional public safety services to all who work or travel on “America’s Railroad.” Our annual report describes our activities throughout the year and summarizes the department’s special events, crime statistics, budget,
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2014
    AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT 2014 OLICE P AMTRAK AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2014 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 1 TABLE of CONTENTS Mission and Vision 3 Message from the Chief 4 Organizational Chart & Demographics 6 New Hires 8 Department Maps 9 New England Division 10 New York Division 17 Mid-Atlantic (North) Division 22 Mid-Atlantic (South) Division 25 Central/Pacific/Southwest Division 28 Special Operations Division 32 K-9 Unit 35 Special Events 37 Environmental Initiatives 38 Administration & Public Affairs 39 Department Awards 40 2013 - 2014 Budget & Expenditures 41 Operations Support 42 Internal Affairs 47 Safety Initiatives 49 Recruiting Efforts 50 Implementation of New Initiatives 51 Milestones 52 Agency Statistics 53 Crime Prevention/Safety 54 Specialized Training 57 Contact Information 59 AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2014 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 2 OUR MISSION Protecting “America’s Railroad” OUR VISION Professionally safeguard Amtrak employees, passengers, patrons and infrastructure through partnerships and best practices while displaying respect and pride. AMTRAK POLICE DEPARTMENT | 2014 ANNUAL REPORT | PAGE 3 Message from the Chief I am proud to present the Amtrak Police Department (APD) 2014 Annual Report. This report highlights the department’s activities throughout the year, which included many important events and achievements. APD supported the New Jersey Transit Police Department throughout the preceding events and game day of Super Bowl XLVIII by providing intelligence and staffing, developed and delivered training to our Operation RAILSAFE partners, and working along with Emergency Management and Corporate Security (EMCS) provided active shooter training to Amtrak employees. A leadership cohort program was developed for our captains, which has been well received, and a video about the APD was produced for recruiting.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline for Carrying a Concealed Firearm in the State of Hawaii by a “Qualified Law Enforcment Officer” Pursuant to 18 United States Code § 926B
    STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL GUIDELINE FOR CARRYING A CONCEALED FIREARM IN THE STATE OF HAWAII BY A “QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCMENT OFFICER” PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE § 926B The following guideline is provided as a courtesy to “Qualified Law Enforcement Officers” that intend to carry a concealed firearm within the State of Hawaii pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 926B. This guideline is NOT a “legal opinion.” You should consult with a licensed attorney for legal advice and interpretation of Hawaii’s firearms laws [Hawaii Revised Statutes chapter 134] and the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 [18 United States Code § 926B]. I. CARRYING A CONCEALED FIREARM IN THE STATE OF HAWAII PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE § 926B. 18 United States Code § 926B, allows a “Qualified Law Enforcement Officer” to carry a concealed firearm in the State of Hawaii if all of the following requirements are met: a. You are currently an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice). [18 U.S.C. § 926B(c) and 18 U.S.C. § 926B(c)(1)]. b. For the purposes of this section, a law enforcement officer of the Amtrak Police Department, a law enforcement officer of the Federal Reserve, or a law enforcement or police officer 149331_5 Revised 4/21/15 of the executive branch of the Federal Government qualifies as an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice).
    [Show full text]
  • DIRECTORY of New York State Criminal Justice Agencies
    NEW YORK STATE Eliot Spitzer, Governor DIRECTORY of New York State Criminal Justice Agencies 21st Edition November 2007 DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES Denise E. O’Donnell Commissioner 8Copyright 2007 by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services Produced by: Office of Justice Research and Performance Table of Contents Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................1 Law Enforcement.......................................................................................................................................................................2 New York State Police.................................................................................................................................................3 New York State Park Police........................................................................................................................................5 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation – Division of Law Enforcement...........................7 Sheriffs’ Offices ...........................................................................................................................................................9 County Police Departments and Police Districts.....................................................................................................15 City, Town, and Village Police Departments...........................................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Safety and Security Amtrak Top Cop Positive Train Control
    ink A Monthly Publication for and by Amtrak Employees Volume 20 • Issue 1 • January/February 2015 Safety and Security Amtrak Top Cop Positive Train Control Train of Thought e deliver intercity transportation and email updates, allows a better line of need to report an emergency or crime. You with superior safety. That is part contact between CNOC and our operations can also volunteer your time with initiatives Wof our mission, a core value and centers to coordinate information going such as the Amtrak Ambassador program a pillar in our Strategic Plan. As the plan to all internal partners who need to be or Operation Lifesaver. Above all, continue defines it: Our Safety and Security goal is to informed of major updates or emergencies to work safely and report injuries and safety set the industry standard for concerning train operations. incidents. safety and security to ensure The Amtrak Police We all have a stake in this, and we can that every customer and Department (APD) is build- all make a difference. n employee goes home injury- ing partnerships with other free every day. law enforcement and security This Safety and Security entities to extend our pro- Help with our goal is critical to our com- tection beyond stations and Safe-2-Safer Goal! pany’s long-term business trains to the full rail network strategy, and we continue to and surrounding area. 400,000 work on initiatives that sup- Our Safety and Security port and reinforce our Safety goal extends to our neighbors, and Security goal. Joseph H. Boardman including those who live, work, 400,000 We are strengthening our travel or play near our right- behavior-based safety process and instill- of-way or any Amtrak property.
    [Show full text]